Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

Your response contains a baseless personal attack because you know you're full of shit. If these H1B education visas are sending people to the same schools we go to, then what's the difference? Are 95% of these H1B candidates bad too? Do you think someone who got a degree in the Punjab got a better education, and if so, why do they need to come here for a degree, or to work?
Just admit it. You hire whoever does a good enough job for the least amount of money. Can you at least be honest about this? It's generally how business works. I'm faced with the same equation. So is everyone. It's alright to just admit that without fabricating some nonsense about how we don't have enough talent.

H-1B is a scam by which white collar companies (not blue collar, because they aren't cool enough) can fire American workers and then replace them with foreign workers who are so happy to get to the States that they will work for $10,000 less per year. (There are laws against this kind of wage fuckery. They work the same as speed laws in Saudi Arabia: No one cares to obey or enforce them. The "shortage" of workers is a lie manufactured by Oracle, Microsoft, etc. in order to cut costs. Most of the comp sci classes I took were filled to the gills, and the program I got into in college was so impacted that I had to go in on another major and switch after the fact. It's like that in lots of places.
Fuck all this H-1B nonsense, and fuck all the liars and misinformed idiots who think we are just gagging for foreign labor.
We aren't gagging for foreign labor. Larry Ellison and Bill Gates are gagging for foreign labor because they can be paid less.

I think you are talking about love and intimacy as though they always go the same way, and that men are like "this" and women are like "that." But that isn't the case. Every relationship is different. In some, it is the man who doesn't want intimacy as much as the woman.

And, you can't tell me inexperienced females come up with stupider ideas than inexperienced males (if anything, I think it's the opposite, 'cause at least most women I know bother to listen for a bit before making a comment, where most young males just shoot off their mouth at the first opportunity).

-Erik

You have stated that women are necessarily better than men at coming up with ideas. You are a sexist. You are also a male, so you are sexist against your own gender. You should get your head examined.

No more are the comments about the technical correctness of ideas being discussed - nope, suddenly there's snide sexual innuendos that slide in. Women are being "bitches" if they fight for their ideas, but, hey, if I (a guy) strongly advocate my idea, that's just fine. And, that's just the start of it. I hear stuff (both in the discussion and afterwards) about such-and-such being "weak" or "avoiding talking" or similar. Not to mention the fact that during such discussions, I'll commonly see that the topic switches from "which idea is best", to "make sure that girl's idea doesn't win". It's annoying, to say the least, and I can understand why many women avoid tech - it's not fun to be constantly harassed or belittled simply due to being the only woman in the room.

Even if this is true, why should a man, who has done nothing wrong, be denied assistance - because of what someone ELSE did - based on the fact that they have the same genitals? We are all individuals. Treating a woman differently because she's a woman is wrong. Treating a man differently because he's a man is also wrong. If a man other than me punched you in the face, would you retaliate against him, or against me, based on the fact that we both have dicks? That would be just as unfair as it was when he punched you.

You should have thought this through more carefully before you commented. There is a difference between wanting to be treated the same as another person, and wanting to be treated better than another person. You should learn that difference. No one wants to stop women from going to school to be programmers, which is precisely what this is about. Trying to say that someone who wants equal treatment is the same as someone who wants to be treated preferentially, to the point of being able to physically hurt them and relegate them to menial work, is utter bullshit.

No one is arguing that private citizens shouldn't be able to give money to whom they please. The complaint that is being made by so many here is that it's sexist, which is the case whether the money is private or public. Whether other grants discriminate or not has no bearing on whether this one is discriminatory. Who is stupid now?

Yes, it is discrimination. If a woman wants to learn how to write code, she already has precisely the same access to resources that she would if she was male. If she wants to sign up for classes, no one is going to stop her. Since the women who want to learn to program have no greater barrier to taking classes than men do, they are in no greater need of any grants than men are, and the grants should be distributed based on actual merit, rather than something the recipients are born with and therefore have no say over. Treating people differently based on how they're born is a great way to define discrimination.

Women have the same opportunity to get degrees and certifications in IT-related fields that men do. They CHOOSE not to of their OWN ACCORD. It was that way when I was in junior college, and again when I was in a 4-year university. The distribution would always look something like 27 men, 3 women.
The registration system for both schools lets you sign up for whatever class you are eligible to take based on prerequisites, as long as there are open seats. If you are a woman, and you try to register for C++, it doesn't say "please don't try to register for this class because you're a woman." (Unlike certain grants offered by certain companies, which will say, "please don't try to apply for this grant if you're a man.") It just lets you register, regardless of your gender, because that's, you know, fair, and exactly as it should be.
This is not a case of 51% of comp sci graduates being women, and then being turned away from jobs based on their sex. This is a case of the vast majority of women simply choosing not to sign up in the first place. They are making this choice of their own free will.
To deny these grants to men is sexist. It places more value on women than it does on men. These assholes at Etsy would gladly collect profits from a man who sells on the site, but then turn around and tell him to go fuck himself if he asked for grant money. It's completely stupid.

I must argue strenuously against the idea of "Reverse discrimination."
There is only one kind of discrimination. "Reverse discrimination" was invented by people who wanted to imply that some people are more worthy of discrimination than others, which itself is discriminatory. It is a perversion of the social outrage that rightly exists against discrimination.

I'm glad my high school lit teacher had us read Animal Farm. This corresponds nicely with the part where the pigs start walking upright. They adopt all the mannerisms of the human farmers they were supposedly trying to get away from, while changing their society's motto from "Four Legs Good, Two Legs Bad" to "Four Legs Good, Two Legs Better."